Are there really only 25 people in the whole country who can run a broadcast newscast?

[ProfessorPlum]

Why (oh why) is it necessary for every fleeing flunky from Faux News to get to continue to broadcast over (in some cases extremely more) legitimate networks? Is the country really clamoring for more Greta V. S.? We can't do without Megyn "White Santa and Jesus" Kelly?

If I'm NBC, I think "you know, we have an entire stable of up and coming talent, and we can employ people who haven't been lying their fool asses off for the last fifteen years". But then, I'm not NBC.

[monmouth4]

1. I now devote my tv time to movies. Inane, many of them but still better than that..LOL..n/t

[ProfessorPlum]

3. a sane plan

[frazzled]

2. There's nothing much to be gained from watching any of it

Whether it's stuff you agree with or not. These people are basically hosts, not reporters. I realized some years ago that there was little to be gained from all the cable so-called news chatter but either righteous indignation or reinforcement of what I already knew or believed. It's mostly chit-chat. It's an addiction.

The only time it's worth watching is to see a live event, or to see live footage and reporting from the field during a crisis. Otherwise, it's not news; it's chatter and opinion and rehash.

I read the newspapers every morning and consult several reliable (or what I consider to be fairly reliable) sites on the Internet. And I get a few magazines for those big-picture think pieces. Beyond that, there's little value to cable news. It's infotainment, that's all.

[ProfessorPlum]

4. I agree with this

but since it is so meaningless, why can't the networks hire people who aren't mendacious assholes to do it?